Southern Baptist Church, and Democrats Options

[Jaq]

A Southern Baptist church in East Waynesville, North Carolina has expelled all of its Democrats

Well, actually 9 of them have been expelled and another additional 40 left as protest.

From another message board:

She (posters mother) said WLOS tv just broke in to report that the East Waynesville Baptist church has officially excommunicated all its democratic members.

She said that before the election, the preacher told the congregation from the pulpit that if they didn't vote for * they had to come to the altar to confess their sins and repent. they could'nt be members. (My Mom doesn't attend that church--she's United Methodist, but I know of lots who do attend).

From Mom's email: "One of the local women who got excommunicated said on TV that it was like a cult. Another man who got excommunicated said that the rest of the congregation stood up and applauded as the Democrats were told to leave."

This seems to signal to me another step towards not just the gradual blurring of the boundary between church and state, but a full blown theocracy.

Ten Commandments in public places, debating homosexual marriage in the context of religion (when it's a secular government policy and wouldn't have any impact on churches as they wouldn't be required to perform homosexual marriage ceremonies), prayer in schools... the list goes on..


What think you? The States heading towards a theocracy, or am I just blowing things out of proportion? Would a theocracy be such a bad thing? Why? Why not? Please submit your essays by 5:00 p.m. 500 words or less.

[believe]

By straight people being allowed to prevent gay people from marrying they are doing much the same thing that those boys did to us; a group of people are denied something they want and that other people consider an ordairy right simply because those people denying them this feel they shouldn't have that right.

Sure. This is something people don't agree on and aren't likely to anytime soon. The people that believe its wrong will continue to fight it and the people that consider it a necessary right will fight for it. Though for the record people often vote on things that don't affect them personally during elections. State policy, gun control laws, laws on oh.. political fund raising, rights of illegal immigrants and whatever else are examples of things that affect a state or society, but not necessarily the individual voting. You could argue that this is an issue of rights and not the same as most of those, but I don't see it stopping people from voting or passing measures, regardless.

It's not like legalising gay marriage will make believers marry people of the same gender, nor will churches be forced to preach it's acceptability. The gay marriage will be there, and believers may not like it but they do not have to participate, and in that sense it won't affect them. Also just because some people consider something not to be acceptable doesn't mean that it shouldn't be acceptable.

Also how will those changes affect them? You say that a change in culture will affect them, but what will those affects be?

At the moment it wouldn't force churches to marry people of whatever orientation, but somehow I can see discrimination lawsuits. Its definitely true that they don't have to participate. And the reverse is true as well. Just because some people consider something acceptable, doesn't make it so. Public opinion once considered slavery a right and justified and lots of horrible things to be acceptable, along with the good ones like various peace movements, people now considering racism horrible and such. There's arguments for both sides, but people considering it acceptable or not isn't my favorite for that reason.

And it could affect whats taught in school (like the battle over sex ed, ect), what they see in movies and popular culture (already happening, but it could progress), what people around or known to them are allowed to do and what their children or others might be encouraged to do. Its not always a personal affect, sure, but we don't live in a vaccuum and friends and family might well be affected by whatever law, even if I'm not.

[CommieBastard]

At the moment it wouldn't force churches to marry people of whatever orientation, but somehow I can see discrimination lawsuits.

This isn't a realistic fear. That kind of lawsuit wouldn't hold a drop of water anytime within the next few centuries; the Supreme Court has been very clear about the right to freedom of expressive association (they've made similar rulings in favour of the Boy Scouts).